Opinion: Even if Donald Trump Loses, Has He Already Won the Policy Argument?

Sometimes I think Donald Trump won the 2020 election. Now I fear he’s already won the 2024 election, too.

To be clear, Joe Biden was rightfully elected president four years ago. And I’m hoping Kamala Harris will win the White House now. But Trumpism, to a frightening degree, has prevailed, capturing public opinion and shaping the direction of the country’s governance.

Why?

Biden’s failure to communicate his own record left a void that Trump filled with his constant rants and rallies. This rhetoric, in turn, pulled Biden toward Trump-style policies. On many issues, Biden’s single term played out like a second term for Trump.

Immigration is the most obvious example. In the 2020 campaign, Biden vowed to reverse Trump’s ugly, bigoted management of immigration. But the president ultimately reinstituted most of Trump’s border policies, including building Trump’s border wall and blocking asylum seekers.

Biden also maintained Trump’s protectionist, damaging policies on trade — expanding tariffs on China and undermining Europe’s green economy. Here in America, Biden kept Trump’s tax cuts in place, while continuing his predecessor’s reckless overspending, running up trillions in new deficits and debt.

Biden’s adoption of Trump policies is both bad policy and bad politics. Limiting immigration and trade, while adding to debt, are economic drags that increase prices and inflation, which have made Biden deeply unpopular.

Harris, thrust into the presidential campaign this summer, had an opportunity to course-correct and embrace the more open, liberal values of her native state. California has righteously added protections and services — from drivers’ licenses to health coverage — for immigrants. (This is a moral and practical imperative since half our children have at least one immigrant parent.) California has also led in forging international collaborations on trade, economic development, and climate.

Instead, Harris doubled down on Biden’s strategy. While Harris is profoundly different than Trump in character and respect for democratic institutions, she has adopted much of Trump’s policy direction as her own.

Indeed, on immigration, she has cast herself as tougher than Trump. The centerpiece of her platform is the most restrictionist American immigration legislation in decades. Trump had Republicans block the legislation. Harris uses Trump’s blockage to say that she will get tough on migrants — while Trump is only willing to talk about anti-immigrant action.

That positioning may be smart political strategy, but it is monstrous, as U.S. Senator Alex Padilla pointed out. The bill effectively shuts down asylum applications, criminalizes border crossings — and does nothing to legalize the millions of unauthorized immigrants who have spent decades here in the U.S. as our valued neighbors and co-workers. Harris also abandoned her support for a path to citizenship for Dreamers,

Harris’ dangerous policies reinforce Trump and others who make false claims about immigrants (they are criminals! they eat pets!) to justify discrimination against them. Is it any wonder that, according to a Scripps News/Ipsos survey, a majority of Americans now favor mass evacuations of unauthorized immigrants?

Immigration is most obvious example of how Harris has conceded the policy argument to Trump. But it’s hardly the only one. On trade, she opposes Trump’s new tariffs but proposes to retain most of Trump’s first-term tariffs, contributing to inflation and international conflict. On the environment, she has sought to match Trump’s enthusiasm for fracking to produce natural gas, despite the climate crisis.

Harris, like Trump, has pandered to wealthy tech investors by lavishly supporting cryptocurrency, despite its obvious risks to the economy. On taxes, Harris would maintain most of the cuts Trump signed during his first term, and add some new tax credits. But she, like Trump, doesn’t explain how she would pay for it. Both candidates would add trillions to the national debt, increasing fast-rising debt service costs that crowd out the new investments and infrastructure the country needs.

Of course, there are profound differences between the candidates on some important issues — especially abortion and on the war in Ukraine. But in so many other areas, Harris has moved close enough that Trump has correctly accused her of copying him. This is quite a victory: a man who has never won the popular vote has nevertheless made himself the center of gravity in American policy.

The justifications for adopting Trump-style policies is political and practical; Harris needs to win this election to save the country from the fate of an unhinged, anti-democratic, vengeful Trump.

But winning the election is not enough. In the long term, you can’t beat back Trumpian fanaticism and fascism by agreeing with most of it.

You beat Trumpism with a clear vision for the future of the country that is so compelling and detailed that it draws attention away from Trump. You beat Trumpism with new policies that get people talking and thinking.

If Harris has such a vision in her, she has yet to share it.

Joe Mathews writes the Connecting California column for Zócalo Public Square, an ASU Media Enterprise publication.